Ana səhifə

A pproaches To Link Checking a qa focus Document


Yüklə 57.5 Kb.
tarix24.06.2016
ölçüsü57.5 Kb.

Briefing-07 Briefing-07

A

pproaches To
Link Checking


A QA Focus Document

Why Bother?


There are several reasons why it is important to ensure that links on Web sites work:

However there are resource implications in maintaining link integrity.

Approaches To Link Checking


A number of approaches can be taken to checking broken links:

  • Web site maintainer may run a link checking tool.

  • A server-based link checking tool may send email notification of broken links.

  • A remote link checking service may send email notification of broken links.

  • Web server error log files may be analysed for requests for non-existent resources.

  • Web server 404 error pages may provide a mechanism for users notifying the Web site maintainer of broken links.

Note that these approaches are not exclusive: Web site maintainers may choose to make use of several approaches.

Policy Issues


There is a need to implement a policy on link checking. The policy could be that links will not be checked or fixed – this policy might be implemented for a project Web site once the funding has finished. For a small-scale project Web site the policy may be to check links when resources are added or updated or if broken links are brought to the project’s attention, but not to check existing resources – this is likely to be an implicit policy for some projects.

A

pproaches To
Link Checking


A QA Focus Document

Why Bother?


There are several reasons why it is important to ensure that links on Web sites work:

  • Web sites are based on hyperlinking, and if hyperlinks fail to work, the Web site can be regarded as not working correctly.

  • Broken links can reflect badly on the body hosting the Web sites.

  • Hyperlinks are increasingly being used to deliver the functionality of Web sites, through links to JavaScript resources, style sheets files, metadata, etc. Broken links to these resources will result in the Web site not functioning as desired.

However there are resource implications in maintaining link integrity.

Approaches To Link Checking


A number of approaches can be taken to checking broken links:

  • Web site maintainer may run a link checking tool.

  • A server-based link checking tool may send email notification of broken links.

  • A remote link checking service may send email notification of broken links.

  • Web server error log files may be analysed for requests for non-existent resources.

  • Web server 404 error pages may provide a mechanism for users notifying the Web site maintainer of broken links.

Note that these approaches are not exclusive: Web site maintainers may choose to make use of several approaches.

Policy Issues


There is a need to implement a policy on link checking. The policy could be that links will not be checked or fixed – this policy might be implemented for a project Web site once the funding has finished. For a small-scale project Web site the policy may be to check links when resources are added or updated or if broken links are brought to the project’s attention, but not to check existing resources – this is likely to be an implicit policy for some projects.

For a Web site one which has a high visibility or gives a high priority to the effectiveness of the Web site, a pro-active link checking policy will be needed. Such a policy is likely to document the frequency of link checking, and the procedures for fixing broken links. As an example of approaches taken to link checking by a JISC service, see the article about the SOSIG subject gateway [1].


Tools


Experienced Web developers will be familiar with desktop link-checking tools, and many lists of such tools are available [2] [3]. However desktop tools normally need to be used manually. An alternative approach is to use server-based link-checking software which send email notification of broken links.

Externally-hosted link-checking tools may also be used. Tools such as LinkValet [4] can be used interactively or in batch. Such tools may provide limited checking for free, with a licence fee for more comprehensive checking.

Another approach is to use a browser interface to tools, possibly using a Bookmarklet [5] although UKOLN’s server-based ,tools approach [6] is more manageable.

Other Issues


It is important to ensure that link checkers check for links other than and . There is a need to check external JavaScript, CSS, etc. files (linked to by the tag) and that checks are carried out on personalised interfaces to resources.

It should also be noted that erroneous link error reports may sometimes be produced (e.g. due to misconfigured Web servers).


References


1 Approaches To 'Spring Cleaning' At SOSIG, QA Focus, UKOLN,

2 Link Management Software, Open Directory,
Software/Internet/Site_Management/Link_Management/>

3 Link Management Software, Google Directory,
Computers/Software/Internet/Site_Management/Link_Management/>

4 LinkValet,

5 Bookmarklets

6 A URI Interface To Web Testing Tools, QA Focus, UKOLN,

For a Web site one which has a high visibility or gives a high priority to the effectiveness of the Web site, a pro-active link checking policy will be needed. Such a policy is likely to document the frequency of link checking, and the procedures for fixing broken links. As an example of approaches taken to link checking by a JISC service, see the article about the SOSIG subject gateway [1].

Tools


Experienced Web developers will be familiar with desktop link-checking tools, and many lists of such tools are available [2] [3]. However desktop tools normally need to be used manually. An alternative approach is to use server-based link-checking software which send email notification of broken links.

Externally-hosted link-checking tools may also be used. Tools such as LinkValet [4] can be used interactively or in batch. Such tools may provide limited checking for free, with a licence fee for more comprehensive checking.

Another approach is to use a browser interface to tools, possibly using a Bookmarklet [5] although UKOLN’s server-based ,tools approach [6] is more manageable.

Other Issues


It is important to ensure that link checkers check for links other than and . There is a need to check external JavaScript, CSS, etc. files (linked to by the tag) and that checks are carried out on personalised interfaces to resources.

It should also be noted that erroneous link error reports may sometimes be produced (e.g. due to misconfigured Web servers).


References


1 Approaches To 'Spring Cleaning' At SOSIG, QA Focus, UKOLN,

2 Link Management Software, Open Directory,
Software/Internet/Site_Management/Link_Management/>

3 Link Management Software, Google Directory,
Computers/Software/Internet/Site_Management/Link_Management/>

4 LinkValet,

5 Bookmarklets

6 A URI Interface To Web Testing Tools, QA Focus, UKOLN,



Produced by QA Focus – supporting JISC’s digital library programmes Oct 2005 Produced by QA Focus – supporting JISC’s digital library programmes Oct 2005


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət